Do you really own your house if you have to pay property taxes?

I live in an apartment overlooking a wooded creek. On the other side of the creek are million dollar homes. Just for kicks I went online and looked up the amount they are paying in property taxes and it’s $20,000-$30,000/year which is 2-2.5% depending on exemptions here in Texas. These are nice houses, but not mansions. They had to pay a million dollars in cash or had to go into debt to buy these houses and for all that they get the right to pay the government thousands of dollars each month in property taxes, which is 3-4x as much as I pay in rent alone. This state is supposed to be low tax, because it doesn’t have an income tax but property taxes have gone up so much that they’ve largely compensated for that. My ultimate question is, when in order to live in your house you have to pay the government $20,000-$30,000/year, do you really own it?

Because of property taxes, there is no real security in your property, no matter what you do. Save your whole life? It can be wiped out by monetary manipulation, inflation. Build your whole life? It can be taken away through eminent domain. Live in a neighborhood that improved? You'll be taxed out of there.

It's theft, plain and simple. Which is why we need a local push for alternatives to funding things like roads, police, fire-fighting and schools (if you're into that sort of thing.)

Those who want liberty must organize as effectively as those who want tyranny. -- Iyad el Baghdadi

There is a tangible cost of protecting property. The entity that protects your property against trespasses and illegal seizure has a valid case for being compensated. If you do that yourself, then maybe you shouldn't have to pay property taxes.

There is also the issue of the natural right to enough land and resources to support yourself and your family. This may sound a bit socialistic, but people should not have to be a slave for most of their lives in order to get the resources necessary to survive. I know it sounds a lot like "land reform" for socialist leaning countries, but I personally believe that enough land to keep a house and/or small farm is a natural right of being alive. If people all had this without property taxes and mortgages, there wouldn't be this huge need for social welfare systems stealing money from one group to entitle others.

In China, they have no property tax. I once read that some Chinese real estate investors came to the US looking for opportunities but left after they were horrified to discover that we have an annual property tax.

Because of property taxes, there is no real security in your property, no matter what you do. Save your whole life? It can be wiped out by monetary manipulation, inflation. Build your whole life? It can be taken away through eminent domain. Live in a neighborhood that improved? You'll be taxed out of there.

It's theft, plain and simple. Which is why we need a local push for alternatives to funding things like roads, police, fire-fighting and schools (if you're into that sort of thing.)

That is why we need to work hard local and get in places that can influence that. Through the suggestions of my town budget committee we privatized a few things and at the same time kept the tax rate low. However, until we privatize schools there will be NO hope for ever getting rid of the property tax.

However, until we privatize schools there will be NO hope for ever getting rid of the property tax.

Different issues in different states. In California if the State and all local governments shut down tomorrow, there would still be another 40 years worth of pensions to pay off. My county now pays more in pension costs than it does in salaries. It's a huge scandal, and I personally believe there's going to be civil unrest over it in California. Government unions have basically bankrupt the state.

In China, they have no property tax. I once read that some Chinese real estate investors came to the US looking for opportunities but left after they were horrified to discover that we have an annual property tax.

There is also the issue of the natural right to enough land and resources to support yourself and your family. This may sound a bit socialistic, but people should not have to be a slave for most of their lives in order to get the resources necessary to survive. I know it sounds a lot like "land reform" for socialist leaning countries, but I personally believe that enough land to keep a house and/or small farm is a natural right of being alive. If people all had this without property taxes and mortgages, there wouldn't be this huge need for social welfare systems stealing money from one group to entitle others.

No, nor your labor if they can put you in jail for not paying income taxes nor your body if you can't sell an organ,commit euthanasia if you have a terminal illness or even smoke a joint without being a criminal.

"Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have.” Barry Goldwater

Not just property tax, but if you have a mortgage/loan you technically do not own the home until it is paid off -- even after all that, you still have to give yearly rent towards your state government. So in a sense, at no point do you really own your property.

Yes, its a backwards world we live in...

Last edited by Humanae Libertas; 03-16-2011 at 07:20 PM.

They use force, to make you do, what the deciders have decided you must do. -- Eldridge Cleaver

There is also the issue of the natural right to enough land and resources to support yourself and your family. This may sound a bit socialistic, but people should not have to be a slave for most of their lives in order to get the resources necessary to survive. I know it sounds a lot like "land reform" for socialist leaning countries, but I personally believe that enough land to keep a house and/or small farm is a natural right of being alive. If people all had this without property taxes and mortgages, there wouldn't be this huge need for social welfare systems stealing money from one group to entitle others.

A bit socialistic? That is straight out of Karl Marx Communist Manifesto. Land "reform" is the foundation for most communist revolutions and the first thing that they do once they win. This is the polar opposite of a libertarian position.

Why are you guys hating on the property tax so much but you're fine with Ron Paul's suggestion of collecting revenue through tariffs? Either way property is being taxed. The only difference in Ron Paul's suggestion is that it's taxed at the time of changing ownership, so I guess it doesn't feel as bad?

And to those of you saying China is so awesome because they don't tax property, don't forget that the Chinese government has stolen land outright throughout the years from millions of its people. They might not tax you on it now, but if turns out they'd like to let GM put a factory on your land, you're shit out of luck.

if modern agriculture continues to follow the path it's on now, it's finished. The food-growing situation may seem to be in good shape today, but that's just an illusion based on the current availability of petroleum fuels. All the wheat, corn, and other crops that are produced on big American farms may be alive and growing, but they're not products of real nature or real agriculture. They're manufactured rather than grown. The earth isn't producing those things.. petroleum is! -Masanobu Fukuoka

Why are you guys hating on the property tax so much but you're fine with Ron Paul's suggestion of collecting revenue through tariffs? Either way property is being taxed. The only difference in Ron Paul's suggestion is that it's taxed at the time of changing ownership, so I guess it doesn't feel as bad?

Tariffs are on IMPORTED goods. These tariffs are a 1 time tax.
Property taxes are on land that can't be exported. I pay yearly property taxes.

A bit socialistic? That is straight out of Karl Marx Communist Manifesto. Land "reform" is the foundation for most communist revolutions and the first thing that they do once they win. This is the polar opposite of a libertarian position.

You clearly haven't thought through some of the issues surrounding libertarianism. First of all the interaction between ownership and the State is not very well defined in an absolute sense. States enforce ownership, so it is somewhat arbitrary for the State to decide in the cases of natural resources who should own them or not.

If you look at records for UK history, the Queen of England should "own" half of Britain and a good part of the rest of the world. Just because some arbitrary deed from a hundred years ago says that somebody is entitled to exclusive use of a part of the Earth, it doesn't morally mean their descendants should have that use in perpetuity.

Certainly enough land to support ones family should be secured and irrevocable. However, it's very difficult to come up with a reason from natural rights that would justify the State protecting a single individual's right to exclusive use of millions of acres of land/water or entire mines for a private individual's use.

People absolutely have a right to their own labor and the benefits of their labor without confiscation in the form of taxation or otherwise. However, claims that the State should use violence to protect huge caches of natural resources for single individuals are extremely dubious. Remember, "ownership" implies that the State will use violence to enforce such rights.

Unequal entitlement to natural resources is actually a very statist concept, essentially saying that the state should intervene to enforce unequal distribution of natural resources.

Why are you guys hating on the property tax so much but you're fine with Ron Paul's suggestion of collecting revenue through tariffs? Either way property is being taxed. The only difference in Ron Paul's suggestion is that it's taxed at the time of changing ownership, so I guess it doesn't feel as bad?

And to those of you saying China is so awesome because they don't tax property, don't forget that the Chinese government has stolen land outright throughout the years from millions of its people. They might not tax you on it now, but if turns out they'd like to let GM put a factory on your land, you're shit out of luck.

Tarrifs, revenue or protective, are only applied when products are transferred between market entities i.e., only during commercial activity.

Property taxes are collected even if you have no intention of selling your property and are just sitting on it and there is no "commerce" in process.

RonPaulForums.com / LibertyForest.com is a grassroots web site with absolutely no official connection to Ron Paul or any election campaign. RonPaulForums.com / LibertyForest.com is privately owned and operated.